Scuba thieves and liars

[cool_hardware52]

Personally, I find, as I implied in my earlier post, that that the majority of the industry is dishonest. I think that getting hung up on patents misses the broader point that probably 95% of the gear on the market today is designed with little marketing gimmicks that actually detract from the utility of the equipment.

Scuba is at this point a fairly mature activity. Any new activity will have a variety of competing "solutions" to any given problem. Over time this will drop to 2 or 3, and eventually converge on one main "solution" with a few alternatives that are not main stream.

When this happens you have a "commodity", i.e. a bag of sugar, everyone is basically the same as the next.

That leaves only gimmicks and bold new graphics as a means of differentiation. Sad, but completely predictable.

Look at beer, it's being sold now based on the container, not the contents.

Look at auto's, who really needs 13 cupholders?

Look at software, does the "new" version of your fav word processor really solve any problems you had with the last version?

Scuba is no different.

Tobin

 

[don Francisco]

I'm not familiar with the particulars you cite, but what makes you think it has anything to do with the scuba industry in particular. Reverse engineering (analyze and copy) is the second oldest form of design methodology. The first guy invented the wheel, the second guy saw one and made his own.

While the patent process offfers some degree of protection, it's a difficult, expensive and imperfect process. I've known inventors who held patents, not be able to afford the litigation process to defend them and conversely seen non-innovations which shouldn't have been patentable successfully prosecute copies. It cuts both ways.

Hopefully, true innovators can get a head start, and acheive some degree of recognition before being copied. This isn't rare because copiers usually wait to see if something new is sucessful before copying it, afterall why copy a failure.

It's frustrating, unfair, and seems immoral, but there's a bright side. Innovators know that there are others dogging their footsteps. This keeps them on their toes, constantly innovating, trying to stay ahead of the pack, and never resting on their laurels. It's social Darwinism at it's cruelest, but in the end everyone benefits from the process.

 

[RJP]

95% of the gear on the market today is designed with little marketing gimmicks that actually detract from the utility of the equipment. The only actual function of these gimmicks is to trick people into buying gear.

Hey, wait a minute...

that's marketing's job!



Here's how R&D and marketing work together:

R&D: We designed a new version of our product
Mktg: What's new about it?
R&D: We added a great new feature.
Mktg: Does the customer actually need that feature?
R&D: What's a customer?

 

[CoralSeaMan]

please dont chime in to give me the 2 cents about how barry has been to court about it, or hollis used to work for oceanic, thats not my point ... but i spoke to a "little guy" a few weeks ago who designed a beautiful set of spring heels awhile back and some thief actually contacted him and asked him for a sample to "carry his line" .... than proceeded to COPY the springs exactly to a "T" and produce their own. (the guy never even paid for the set he copied) he went on to explain to me that patents and copyrights in our industry are so costly and time consuming (and for the slight overhead and productivity of such and item) that it usually is not worth going through with it such protection... ...

"Spring heels" were not this designer's idea. They were modification of some other designer's idea. Springs were not that designer's idea. They were from some other person's creation. The patent rules are simply an effort to provide some ownership rights to ideas or what is known as "intellectual property." The fundamental question is whether ideas can be owned? In this society we have decided they can be, at least for a while.

 

[RonzoTheGreat]

coral ... perhaps you are right .... my "little guy" is about 70 years old and on his way out of the business, perhaps he is not the original perhaps he is .... but i see your point

 

[cool_hardware52]

Hopefully, true innovators can get a head start, and acheive some degree of recognition before being copied. This isn't rare because copiers usually wait to see if something new is sucessful before copying it, afterall why copy a failure.

Very true. Why spend on R&D and market research when it's easy and cheap to simply stroll past the smaller booths at DEMA?

BTW, Most ideas that receive patents are never produced, and only a small percentage of the ones that are actually produced are economic successes. Having a idea worth stealing is pretty rare.

It's frustrating, unfair, and seems immoral, but there's a bright side. Innovators know that there are others dogging their footsteps. This keeps them on their toes, constantly innovating, trying to stay ahead of the pack, and never resting on their laurels. It's social Darwinism at it's cruelest, but in the end everyone benefits from the process.

Well that's one way to look at it. There is a downside. When the little guys get consistently ripped off they eventually just "stay home" Why bother? That hurts everybody, even the knock off specialists. That's as stupid as a parasite that kills it's host.

Tobin

 

[ScubaSteve]

A Patent grants a monopoly for a limited period of time on the manufacture,use and sale of an invention. These rights last between 14 and 20 years, depending on the type of invention. Patents do have some costs involved and they can be time consuming, However, small inventors can include a declaration asking for a reduction in the filing fee.........

Correct! Just to add to this....a couple points. A patent does not necessarily guarantee you protection in every country in the world. And let us not forget, it requires costly and time consuming legal action to fight any battle. This becomes a battle in futility very quickly if the manufacturer is not North American (if the Patent is US or Canadian). A previous employer of mine was in court for 3 years over copyright infringment and finally lost (even though the design was completely different). Cost them millions in settlement costs PLUS all the legal costs. While a Patent will make it easier to say you are right, it does not guarantee you anything.

 

[Andy077]

Hey, wait a minute...

that's marketing's job!



Here's how R&D and marketing work together:

R&D: We designed a new version of our product
Mktg: What's new about it?
R&D: We added a great new feature.
Mktg: Does the customer actually need that feature?
R&D: What's a customer?

From my point of view it works like this:

Mktg: We want to make this wonderful new claim!
R&D: What you're suggesting may be impossible, adds no real improvement, but we might be able to do it in a year, with enough resources.
Mktg: We already announced it, it goes on sale in 30 days!

 

[ScubaSteve]

Duplicate post?? I guess somehow it got posted before I was done. Oops.

 

[ScubaSteve]

Originally Posted by RJP
Hey, wait a minute...

that's marketing's job!

Here's how R&D and marketing work together:

R&D: We designed a new version of our product
Mktg: What's new about it?
R&D: We added a great new feature.
Mktg: Does the customer actually need that feature?
R&D: What's a customer?

From my point of view it works like this:

Mktg: We want to make this wonderful new claim!
R&D: What you're suggesting may be impossible, adds no real improvement, but we might be able to do it in a year, with enough resources.
Mktg: We already announced it, it goes on sale in 30 days!

You guys are cracking me up. For anybody in manufacturing....this rings too true. Thanks for the breath of fresh air. Some days you start to think maybe it is all a bad dream but this tells me you have had the same dream